Cameron’s claim that he exercised his veto in Britain’s interests has won plaudits from the right-wing media, but needs to be exposed as the most staggering hyperbole, and proof that his Government exists for the benefit of the few and not the many.

The key issue on which Cameron split from the rest of Europe was the Robin Hood Tax – something he claims to support at a global level.

This week saw the Conservative Party’s dependence on hedge funds exposed once and for all by, of all people, the Financial Times.
As Carl Roper has argued over at Stronger Unions, attempts by Conservative Central Officer to argue that all this money doesn’t buy anything in the way of access and influence ring staggeringly hollow, given that this is precisely what Tories claim unions are doing.

Already mobilised by the success of campaigners in getting a draft European Union directive tabled, the inclusion of common corporation taxes and a Financial Transactions Tax (FTT, aka Robindhood tax) as one of the four key objectives for the summit sent the financial sector into overdrive.

They were revealed to be demanding legal action against any attempt by the EU to impose even a eurozone FTT.

As Will Hutton argued in the Observer yesterday, claims that the interests of the City’s financial ‘masters of the universe’ align with the interests of the rest of the UK stretch credibility.

The million-strong financial sector workforce are mostly working in high street banks and insurance companies, and only a fraction of the third of a million working in the City are implicated in the high frequency trading that an FTT would target.

As several European commentators noted, the common perception of Europe’s other heads of government is that it is precisely the deregulated City of London (and its close allies on Wall Street) that got us into the current mess in the first place.

About the author
Owen Tudor is an occasional contributor to LC. He is head of the TUC’s European Union and International Relations Department and blogs more regularly at the Touchstone blog.· Other posts by Owen Tudor

Oh I am sorry that I have had enough of incompetent bastards who do not understand the very subject they are trying to influence or govern, running around the UK and Europe causing absolute chaos and damage to millions of people who just want to live there lives.

I’m not sure the FTT had anything to do with it, but if it did, why the hell was the FTT part of the deal to save the Euro? It has nothing to do with it. Sure, some more tax revenue would help but it would hardly be material for Italy, Spain and if nations want to tax their banks they are free to do so. Why on earth woudl the Germans and French insist that adopting an FTT is part of the deal? Especially knowing that the UK was against it, whats the point? If the FTT really as the reason Cameron said no, then the French and Germans cannot really have wanted the UK to sign else they’d just have left the FTT out of the treaty.

If the FTT really as the reason Cameron said no, then the French and Germans cannot really have wanted the UK to sign else they’d just have left the FTT out of the treaty.

The FTT wasn’t part of the treaty. What Cameron asked for, and was refused, was a protocol about the City of London which stated, effectively, that the UK would hold a veto about financial regulations that directly affect the City. That’s arguably nothing more than a formal restatement of a well-established convention – that Member States get a veto when something directly affects an area of particular national interest.

This would probably include an FTT (which, as a tax needs unanimity anyway), but extends more widely to cover the sort of regulations aimed at hedge funds which France, in particular, has been pushing for more than three years. It’s been argued that asking for this sort of formal arrangement was an indication of the UK’s lack of faith in its partners, and it was this that triggered its refusal. Incidentally, for those who argue it’s all about DC’s love for banks and bankers, one of the things that Cameron wanted a carve-out on was to apply stricter capital adequacy ratios on UK banks than are allowed for under EU law.

Anyway, France & Germany refused to accept this (for whatever reason) and in its absence (especially having asked for it) Cameron had little choice but to veto a new Treaty, not least because accepting it on those terms would need to be ratified by a referendum, which would have been lost.

“Why on earth woudl the Germans and French insist that adopting an FTT is part of the deal?”

Because a FTT works better if contains more countries, particuarly a country like the UK with a large financial sector. There is also an element of wanting to get back at hedge funds, currency speculators, banks etc who they blame for the crisis.

“French and Germans cannot really have wanted the UK to sign ”

Perhaps, if they insisted agreement on FTT was an essential part of the deal. But I think it is more simple that that – the rest of the EU has simply got sufficiently pissed off at the UK’s eurosceptic press and attitude that they no longer care whether we remain a part of it. Whilst the tabloids are praising Cameron for standing up for britain (in reality standing up for hedge funds), the rest of europe simply views it as a ‘toys out of the pram’ moment. Rather than be seen to be constructively helping the eurozone find a solution, we are now irrelevant. Not a position any country with asperations to be influential wants to be in.

Well the restoration of confidence from the Great Summit to end all summits lasted precisely one day. Mr Market is correctly giving the nonexistent proposals to do anything about the problems in the EZ a big thumbs down today. A one day rally must be a record even for these numpties. The downgrade fun still to come with France heading for a two notch downgrade.

Can we nix this myth once and for all? The FTT was *not* something demanded as part of the treaty. Cameron petulantly militated to get safeguards about the FTT, a separate issue from the euro treaty. He put it on the agenda. Don’t swallow the rubbish pumped out by the europhobic press about this.

“you’re unable to reason through the consequences of what you call for.”

I guess your right, its how I came to be so against government cuts I appear to be an extremist, yet at the same time are for cuts right across Europe, I am actually angry at my prime minster because from my point of view he tried to block this..its all his fault.

[…] pressure to regulate the sector to protect the world from the effects of future crashes. As Liberal Conspiracy pointed out “ the common perception of Europe’s other heads of government is that it is […]

[…] Democrat Voice labels Cameron a hostage to his party and the right wing press (not to mention his hedge-fund paymasters) when it comes to Europe, although Eoin Clark at Liberal Conspiracy has 10 reasons why Cameron […]